Developmental and Behavioral Screening

Glascoe, Frances Page

doi:10.1007/0-387-32931-5_19

Cited by 26 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently a large percentage, 50% to 80%, of children with developmental delays is only detected after school entry, thereby missing the opportunity to achieve maximum outcomes in the preschool years [4][5][6]. This late referral may be due to the type of symptoms or to the cost and time-consuming nature of evaluations by professionals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric properties and validation of Portuguese version of Ages & Stages Questionnaires (3rd edition): 9, 18 and 30 Questionnaires

Lopes

Graça²,

Teixeira³

et al. 2015

Early Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric properties and validation of Portuguese version of Ages & Stages Questionnaires (3rd edition): 9, 18 and 30 Questionnaires

Lopes

Graça²,

Teixeira³

et al. 2015

Early Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Ideally, a screening instrument should have values of sensitivity and specificity above 70-80% [14]. As mentioned, all values of sensitivity and specificity of RALF were above 71% for the three age groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For European Portuguese, however, to the best of our knowledge, there is no valid and reliable pre-school screening instrument for speech and language development. The development of screening instruments must comply with the requirements of psychometric characteristics: reliability, validity, and criterion-related validity (sensitivity and specificity, positive predictive value [PPV] and negative predictive value [NPV]) [14][15][16]. According to Law et al [17] in their systematic review of speech and language screening, the optimal age range for accurate screening is 3-5 years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a Paediatric Speech and Language Screening (RALF)

Lousada

Valente

Mendes

2016

Folia Phoniatr Logop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: This study aims to analyse psychometric characteristics of the Portuguese Paediatric Speech and Language Screening (RALF) test. Methods: 202 Portuguese children aged 3; 0–5; 11 were recruited from 4 kindergartens participating in this study. Reliability and validity (sensitivity and specificity) data were obtained and analysed. Results: Content validity, analysed by an expert panel (general practitioner, kindergarten, teacher, nurse, and speech and language pathologist) revealed that the items were representative and relevant for the content the instrument intends to measure. Sensitivity values were 95, 96, and 83% and specificity values were 85, 84, and 71% for the age groups 3; 0–3; 11, 4; 0–4; 11, and 5; 0–5; 11, respectively. Internal consistency, calculated through Cronbach’s alpha, was 0.7, 0.8, and 0.7, respectively. The inter-judge reliability (interclass correlation coefficient) was 0.951. The results ensure the content validity of RALF. Sensitivity and specificity values revealed that RALF could discriminate typical from disordered speech-language developing children. RALF also presented good internal consistency and excellent reliability. Conclusion: RALF is a reliable and valid screening instrument that health and educational professionals can use in Portuguese children to identify children who may need a speech-language diagnosis for consideration or referral to speech therapy services.

show abstract

“…Le dépistage est la première étape pour identifier les enfants à risque (Center for Early Education and Development;CEED, 1989). Cette évaluation doit être utilisée lorsque la difficulté n'est pas encore documentée (Glascoe et Shapiro, 1999). Il est important de mentionner que les outils de dépistage ont un pouvoir de prédiction pauvre relativement à l'identification de la problématique spécifique de l'enfant.…”

Section: éValuer Pour Dépisterunclassified

Intervention précoce et instruments d'évaluation des jeunes enfants ayant un trouble du spectre autistique

Rousseau

Dionne

Paquet

2012

rfdi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cet article propose une réflexion sur les différents types d’outils d’évaluation utilisés en intervention précoce, en tentant de préciser les motifs de leur utilisation. Ainsi, les évaluations utiles à des fins de dépistage, de diagnostic et d’intervention seront situées les unes par rapport aux autres. Ce dernier type d’évaluation sera particulièrement détaillé, considérant son importance au niveau des services et pratiques d’intervention précoce. Finalement, afin d’illustrer ces distinctions, des exemples d’outils d’évaluations utilisés auprès des enfants présentant un trouble du spectre de l’autisme seront présentés. Il s’agit des instruments suivants: le CHecklist for Autism in Toddlers, l’Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic (ADOS-G) et le Profil Psychoéducatif – Troisième Édition (PEP-3).

show abstract

Developmental and Behavioral Screening

Cited by 26 publications

References 38 publications

Psychometric properties and validation of Portuguese version of Ages & Stages Questionnaires (3rd edition): 9, 18 and 30 Questionnaires

Psychometric properties and validation of Portuguese version of Ages & Stages Questionnaires (3rd edition): 9, 18 and 30 Questionnaires

Validation of a Paediatric Speech and Language Screening (RALF)

Intervention précoce et instruments d'évaluation des jeunes enfants ayant un trouble du spectre autistique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About